linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/15] ARM: pxa: change SSP devices allocation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1ko=YEwR2VOahH0OWHfeOyWAzDYah4DSohBcvTNq_MKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 3 Apr 2018 17:53:25 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
Cc:     Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
        Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
        Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/15] ARM: pxa: change SSP devices allocation

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 5:32 PM, Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr> wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> writes:
>
> chop chop ... removed several mail recipients to leave only the ASoC / PXA
> subset ...
>
>> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 4:26 PM, Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> +static struct pxa_ssp_info pxa_ssp_infos[] = {
>>> +       { .dma_chan_rx_name = "ssp1_rx", .dma_chan_tx_name = "ssp1_tx", },
>>> +       { .dma_chan_rx_name = "ssp1_rx", .dma_chan_tx_name = "ssp1_tx", },
>>> +       { .dma_chan_rx_name = "ssp2_rx", .dma_chan_tx_name = "ssp2_tx", },
>>> +       { .dma_chan_rx_name = "ssp2_rx", .dma_chan_tx_name = "ssp2_tx", },
>>> +       { .dma_chan_rx_name = "ssp3_rx", .dma_chan_tx_name = "ssp3_tx", },
>>> +       { .dma_chan_rx_name = "ssp3_rx", .dma_chan_tx_name = "ssp3_tx", },
>>> +       { .dma_chan_rx_name = "ssp4_rx", .dma_chan_tx_name = "ssp4_tx", },
>>> +       { .dma_chan_rx_name = "ssp4_rx", .dma_chan_tx_name = "ssp4_tx", },
>>> +};
>>
>> This part looks odd to me, you're adding an extra level of indirection to
>> do two stages of lookups in some form of platform data.
> That's unfortunately right.
>
>> Why can't you just always use "rx" and "tx" as the names here?
> Well I couldn't. I'll explain you why, and maybe you'll find a better solution.
>
> That all is related to how ASoC and SSP interact.
> If I remember correctly, here is how it works :
>  - the DMA channel is requested in sound/arm/pxa2xx-pcm-lib.c:128
>         return snd_dmaengine_pcm_open(
>                 substream, dma_request_slave_channel(rtd->platform->dev,
>    The trick is that the device here is _not_ the SSP one, it's if memory serves
>    me well the pxa-pcm-audio one.
>
>    As a consequence, the device cannot be used to differenciate which SSP
>    exactly is providing the sound samples stream. This information is
>    nevertheless required to choose the correct requestor line, which is a 1-to-1
>    match to the SSP port.
>
>    The indirection in the channel name is used to choose the correct requestor
>    line for a given SSP port providing the samples.
>
>    It also must be underlined that this dma request serves both AC97 and SSP as
>    sample providers.

I'm still unable to follow through that code, but I understand now that
the device you pass to dma_request_slave_channel() is not the one
we'd like it to be here.

Where exactly does that call to dma_request_chan() happen? Is this
the one in dmaengine_pcm_new()? Could we perhaps put a
pointer to the SSP device into snd_dmaengine_dai_dma_data?

       Arnd